While District Judge Ashish Aggarwal quashed the gag order as it applied to four journalists — Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, and Ayush Joshi — another bench led by District Judge Sunil Chaudhary heard and reserved judgment on a similar appeal filed by Paranjoy Guha Thakurta.

The result is a split: four journalists regain freedom to publish, while Guha — a veteran journalist who has consistently reported on the Adani Group — as well as John Doe (the rest of the un-named world) remains gagged until his appeal is decided.

The September 6 Gag Order: A blanket injunction

On September 6, 2025, Special Senior Civil Judge Anuj Kumar Singh (Rohini Courts) passed an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Adani Enterprises Ltd. (AEL). The order targeted both journalists, including Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, Ayush Joshi, and websites such as pranjoy.in, adaniwatch.org, adanifiles.com.au.

Findings: The judge recorded that reports were “incorrect, unverified, and prima facie defamatory.”

Directions:

• Journalists restrained from “publishing/distributing/circulating unverified, unsubstantiated and ex-facie defamatory reports” about Adani Enterprises.
• Ordered to expunge defamatory material from articles, social media posts, and tweets, or remove them entirely within five days.
• Intermediaries required, under IT Rules 2021, to disable access to flagged content within 36 hours, while preserving records for 180 days.
• Liberty to Adani to supply links/URLs of allegedly defamatory material to intermediaries for direct takedown.
• Scope extended to future publications, allowing the plaintiff to identify and seek removal of material not yet published.

While the order claimed to respect Article 19(1)(a) by allowing “fair, verified reporting,” its net effect was a blanket, John Doe–style injunction that outsourced censorship to the plaintiff and intermediaries, effectively criminalising future criticism.

The complete order may be read here.

Appeal of Ravi Nair and Others: Submissions and relief

The four journalists — Nair, Dasgupta, Das, and Joshi — appealed before District Judge Ashish Aggarwal (MCA No. DJ/30/2025).

Submissions by the journalists: Appearing for them, Advocate Vrinda Grover, assisted by Nakul Gandhi, Soutik Banerjee, and Devika Tulsiani, made the following arguments:

• No urgency: Most of the impugned publications were already in the public domain since June 2024. The plaintiff waited over a year and then sought an “extraordinary and exceptional relief” ex-parte.
• Lack of reasoning: The trial court had provided no reasoning for branding the reports as “unverified” or “defamatory.” Many articles relied on official material, including:
  • Statements by the Kenyan government, and
  • A Swiss judgment.
• Blanket injunction: The gag was a “John Doe order” extending to hundreds of videos and posts, and even to future material.
• Freedom of the press: Grover reminded the court that the press acts as the vehicle for citizens’ right to free expression.
• Locus questioned: Since some articles dealt with Gautam Adani personally, Grover argued that AEL had no locus to sue on his behalf, especially as Gautam Adani himself had not approached the court.

Submissions by Adani Enterprises: Represented by Senior Advocate Jagdeep Sharma and Advocate Vijay Aggarwal, Adani argued:

• The journalists were conducting a deliberate campaign of malicious targeting.
• Every retweet, like, or republication amounted to fresh defamation, justifying urgent relief.
• The suit was prompted by a podcast in August 2025 that allegedly reignited circulation of defamatory content.
• The ex-parte order was lawful under CPC, and the defendants could have approached the trial court under Order 39 Rule 4 to vacate it.
• Journalists were allegedly under NIA probe for Chinese funding, questioning their credibility.

Judge Aggarwal’s findings: After hearing both sides, Judge Aggarwal quashed the September 6 gag order as it applied to the four appellants.

Key reasoning:

1. Violation of natural justice: The Judge held that unless the appellants are heard, it is not open to the court to infer that they have made unverified, inaccurate and irresponsible statements.
2. Chilling effect:
   • The order stated that by extending to future articles, the injunction created a “sword hanging over” journalists, exposing them to contempt without prior adjudication.
   • Intermediaries were left to decide what was defamatory, a function reserved for the courts.
3. Irreversible harm: As per the judge, the effect of removal of the articles by an ad interim ex-parte order is sweeping and has the effect of decreeing the suit itself without a trial because the articles cannot be restored.
4. Procedural Breach:
   • The trial court fixed the next date for October 9 — outside the 30-day limit in Order 39 Rule 3A CPC for adjudicating interim injunctions.
   • By doing so, it “disempowered itself”.

Order: The September 6 gag order was set aside insofar as the four appellants are concerned. The matter was remitted to the trial court to hear both parties afresh on September 26 and decide by October 15. Importantly, the judge clarified that no finding on merits was being made.

The complete order may be read here.

The Guha Appeal: Submissions and status

Separately, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta — also a defendant in the September 6 order — filed an appeal before District Judge Sunil Chaudhary.

Guha’s arguments (via Sr. Adv. Trideep Pais, Advocates Apar Gupta & team):

• The injunction was overbroad, covering even Adani Group companies not party to the suit.
• The trial court failed to identify which parts of his articles were defamatory, issuing a blanket restraint.
• Many articles were old (2017, 2023), making the plea of urgency untenable.
• The injunction outsourced censorship to intermediaries, leaving the plaintiff to decide what was defamatory.
• Guha had material to substantiate his reporting, but was denied an opportunity to present it.

Adani’s response (via Sr. Advs. Anurag Ahluwalia, Jagdeep Sharma, Vijay Aggarwal):

• Guha had engaged in a persistent campaign of vilification.
• Articles likening Adani to Elon Musk and suggesting Modi promoted him abroad were defamatory per se.
• Allegations of scams were made without evidence, harming market reputation.
• Reliance placed on the Supreme Court’s clean chit in the Hindenburg matter.

Court: District Judge Sunil Chaudhary reserved verdict on Guha’s appeal. Until then, the gag order remains operative against him.

Defamation as a weapon

The Adani gag order litigation illustrates, in stark terms, how defamation law can be converted from a protective remedy into a powerful weapon of silencing. Both the trial court’s September 6 injunction and the fragmented relief granted on appeal show how civil defamation proceedings, especially when combined with ex-parte interim orders, can become tools of censorship rather than adjudication.

1. Fragmented outcomes: The September 6 gag order was sweeping in scope, binding multiple journalists and even websites in one stroke. Yet when appeals were filed, the outcome splintered: Judge Ashish Aggarwal quashed the injunction for four journalists — Ravi Nair, Abir Dasgupta, Ayaskant Das, and Ayush Joshi — but Judge Sunil Chaudhary reserved judgment on Paranjoy Guha Thakurta’s appeal, leaving him still gagged. This fragmented relief underscores how procedural happenstance can fracture the landscape of press freedom. For the same order, some are free to write, while others remain restrained, illustrating how defamation litigation can divide journalists and create unequal shields against censorship.
2. Blanket nature of the gag: The trial court’s injunction went far beyond restraining specific contested articles. It extended to future publications, empowered Adani Enterprises to directly flag content for takedown, and even covered Adani Group companies not party to the suit. In effect, the court deputised a private corporation to decide what was defamatory, reducing the judiciary to a rubber stamp. This blanket approach transformed defamation from a narrow legal shield into a censorship weapon, undermining both due process and the principle of proportionality in restrictions on speech.
3. Chilling effect: Perhaps most insidious was the injunction’s chilling effect. By threatening contempt without prior adjudication, the order created a climate of fear not only among the defendants but across the wider journalistic community. A journalist considering a future report on Adani would know that any critical statement could, at Adani’s discretion, be branded defamatory and removed by intermediaries within 36 hours. This sword of silence deters even legitimate reporting, showing how defamation can be wielded not to correct falsehoods but to prevent scrutiny altogether.
4. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs): The case fits the textbook profile of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP). SLAPPs are not designed to win on legal merits but to impose the process as punishment: draining time, money, and energy of journalists, forcing them into prolonged litigation simply to preserve their right to publish. The September 6 order — sweeping, ex-parte, and extended to future works — exemplifies how corporations can deploy defamation suits as a tool of intimidation, deterring watchdog journalism by turning the courtroom into a battlefield of attrition.
5. Appellate vigilance but limited reach: Judge Aggarwal’s ruling offers an important corrective, restoring procedural fairness by emphasising that journalists must be heard before their work is branded defamatory. He noted that once articles are removed, the damage cannot be undone, making ex-parte injunctions equivalent to decreeing the suit itself. Yet his quashing applied only to the four appellants before him. For Guha and others, the gag persists. This limited scope highlights the structural weakness of fragmented relief: while vigilance at the appellate stage is commendable, the chilling effect continues as long as parts of the injunction remain operative. Defamation as a weapon, once unleashed, cannot be fully neutralised by piecemeal judicial correction.

Conclusion

The Adani gag order saga demonstrates how civil defamation, when coupled with ex-parte injunctions, can be weaponised against investigative journalism. The September 6 order was not merely a protective measure; it was a far-reaching censorship tool. The appellate court’s partial quashing restores some balance, but by leaving other journalists still bound, it reveals the vulnerabilities of India’s press to fragmented judicial relief and corporate litigation strategies.

In this sense, the case is more than a private dispute: it is a cautionary tale of how defamation law, if unchecked, can mutate into a mechanism of silencing, punishing those who speak truth to power, and warning others not to even try.

For Ravi Nair and three others, the gag order is gone, at least temporarily. For Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, it still looms, pending judgment.

The episode reveals both the danger of sweeping ex-parte gag orders and the piecemeal nature of appellate relief in India’s courts. Until broader judicial clarity emerges, investigative journalism remains vulnerable to corporate defamation suits wielded as instruments of censorship.

Related:

Supreme Court allows Mahesh Raut six weeks’ medical bail in Bhima Koregaon case

The Conspiracy of Silence: HC denies bail to Delhi riots accused

Supreme Court seeks states’ replies on pleas for stay of anti-conversion laws, to decide on interim stay after six weeks

Not Proscribed, Not Prima Facie: The labyrinth of bail under UAPA

The post Adani Gag Orders Face Judicial Scrutiny: Four journalists secure relief, Guha’s appeal still pending appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This judgement and arrest warrant by a US District Court follows years of questionable directives from the Ministry of Power, including mandatory procurement of expensive solar power and forced coal imports, benefitting a few business conglomerates while burdening consumers. These actions have strained DISCOM’s finances and defrauded the public.

A group of experts from the power sector, retired bureaucrats and bank officials called the People’s Commission on Public Sector and Public Services has “demanded an independent judicial investigation into these allegations to uncover the role of implicated entities and public officials, assess the financial loss to consumers, and ensure accountability. Those found guilty must face prosecution, blacklisting and financial penalties, including compensation to affected consumers. Besides, the government must present a full report to Parliament within six months to restore public trust and uphold consumer rights.”

The US  District Court (Eastern District Court of New York)’s recent indictment of several Indian companies, including Adani Green, part of the the Adani conglomerate and the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI), a CPSE, says the PCPSPS statement raises disturbing concerns not only about large-scale corporate corruption that evidently prevails in India and the USA but also about how fraudulent policies adopted by the Union Ministry of Power at the instance of favoured business conglomerates have defrauded electricity consumers across the country.

In this connection, he PCPSPS has also referred to their statements issued on  June 2, 2022, June 30, 2022 and  August 16, 2024 in which the group of experts had repeatedly pointed out how the Ministry of Power irregularly invoked its authority under Section 11 of the Electricity Act of 2003 to impose an obligation on State power utilities to buy electricity from solar power plants to meet at least 10% of their total electricity requirement, irrespective of its unit cost and affordability. Similarly, the Centre created a man-made coal shortage situation across the country and the Ministry of Power equally irregularly ordered the State power utilities to buy coal from overseas sources to cover the shortage. Both those measures indirectly benefitted a few domestic private business groups known to be close to the ruling political executive at the cost of electricity consumers across the country. Such consumer-unfriendly measures so blatantly adopted by the Ministry led one to the inevitable inference that the policies adopted by the Ministry of Power during the last several years were at the instance of a few business conglomerates close to the executive, certainly not for safeguarding the interests of millions of electricity consumers, many below the poverty line.

The PCPSPS has also expressed the hope that institutions like SEBI function independently so as to reinforce the integrity of the stockmarkets and elicit public trust.

The US court’s judgement, based on detailed investigations by US Security Exchange Commission and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation, clearly points to how the Adani Group officials acting in tandem with a US company persuaded SECI and the State-owned power utilities in several States including Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Chhattisgarh, Odisha and J&K to sign one-sided Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) that would enable those private companies to earn billions of dollars of profits over the next several decades, entirely at the cost of the electricity consumers in India. In the process, ably supported by the Ministry of Power’s anti-consumer policies and diktats, the private companies not only defrauded unwary consumers, crippled DISCOMs’ finances but also committed fraud on the public at large.

The PCPSPS has also demanded that,  under independent judicial oversight, a comprehensive investigation of this be taken up by CBI/ ED/ CBDT and other investigating agencies to gather further evidence from the US SEC/ FBI, factual evidence on the circumstances that led to the Union Ministry of Power adopting such misguided policies and issuing such illegal directives to States, the role of the concerned Indian business conglomerates including the extent to which they unduly benefitted, the one-sided nature of the PPAs, the role of public funcionaries at the Centre and in the States and the extent of loss suffered by electricity consumers in the country.

If the allegations emerging out of the indictment are found to be true, the Commission states that, not only the concerned business conglomerates and their promoters be blacklisted and prohibited from underataking activities in the electricity sector in the future but they should be forced to pay a deterrent penalty in addition to compansating electricity consumers for the additional costs borne by them on account of these acts of malfeasance. The culprits should be prosecuted for their criminal liability under the relevant laws.

Most of all a comprehensive report should be placed before Parliament within six months.

Related:

Modi govt distancing from Adanis? MoEFCC ‘defers’ 1500 MW project in Western Ghats

Supreme Court gives two journalists interim protection from Gujarat police arrest over article against Adani Group (Hindenburg issue)

UP cancels Adani’s tenders even as RSS’ Organiser inspires a social media onslaught alleging a conspiracy against ‘Adani brand of nationalism’

The post Adani controversy: Experts and retired bank officials demand accountability for corporate and policy corruption in India’s power sector appeared first on SabrangIndia.

However, the recent allegations by Hindenburg Research-a US Based short selling firm-against Securities Exchange Board of India(SEBI) Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch saw no such reaction from the government. Meanwhile, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) -constituted by the Parliament comprising of selected members of Parliament and currently headed by Congress’ Lok Sabha Member K.C.Venugopal has reportedly summoned the heads of SEBI and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) for a deposition on October 24, to review the functioning of top regulatory authorities.

Much has happened since August 10th- the day on which fresh allegations were levelled against Madhuri Buch that she had a stake in obscure offshore entities that were used to siphon money related to the Adani group. This article presents a picture of what has happened until now concerning the conflict of interest and other allegations against Madhabi Puri Buch and how she has responded to them. It is important to note here that Hindenburg Research- the primary mover of the allegations is a short selling firm which would benefit from the fall of the stock that they are shorting; and that Hindenburg had previously reported on alleged stock manipulation and related party transactions related to the Adani Group.

A brief background of the original Adani Report by Hindenburg becomes necessary here. Gautam Adani- the founder and chairman of the Adani group became one of the wealthiest people in the world and the wealth he amassed was largely through stock price appreciation in the group’s 7 key listed companies. The allegation was that that Vinod Adani- Gautam Adani’s brother – operates “vast labyrinth” of offshore shell entities with no operations, employees, independent addresses or meaningful online presence but were used to move billions of dollars into Adani’s publicly listed and private entities, often without required disclosure of the related party nature of the deals. It was further alleged that these offshore entities served as harbours to launder money through Adani’s private companies into listed companies’ balance sheets “in order to maintain the appearance of financial health and solvency.”

Primary Allegations by Hindenburg Research against Madhabi Buch-August 10, 2024

The following form the crux of first set of allegations by Hindenburg against Madhabi Buch-which the former claims to be based on Whistleblower Documents: 

A. On having stake in an Obscure allegedly Adani related fund, as alleged by Hindeburg:

1. A director who used to be with the Adani Group—Anil Ahuja— had set up an offshore entity -IPE Plus Fund through India Infoline in Mauritius which had only $38.43 million in assets under management at the end of December 2017. A Vinod Adani controlled firm called the Global Dynamic Opportunities Fund (GDOF)- which invested Adani Group’s siphoned funds in offshore entities to funnel back into stock markets, invested in the IPE Plus Fund too.
2. Madhabi Puri Buch and her husband-Dhaval Buch first appear to have opened their account with IPE Plus Fund on June 5th, 2015, in Singapore.
3. Before 2017 April-the month in which Madhabi Puri Buch was appointed as the Whole Time Member of SEBI, her husband Dhaval Buch wrote a letter to the fund administrator to make him the sole person authorised to operate the accounts.
4. Despite this change, on February 25th, 2018- Madhabi Buch wrote to India Infoline, from her personal email, to engage in business under her husband’s name to redeem funds.

Based on these, Hindenburg questioned the transactions with a fund that is linked to Adani, while in position of power.

B. On IPO to Real Estate Investment Trusts backed by Blackstone, as alleged by Hindenburg

The following form the crux of second set of allegations that Hindenburg levelled against Madhabi Puri Buch on her open encouragements of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)- a form of investment backed by the firm her husband works for. A REIT is a company that owns income-producing real estate, allowing investors to earn dividends without direct property management.

1. Dhaval Buch-Madhabi Puri Buch’s husband worked as a Chief Procurement Officer at the consumer company Unilever, according to his LinkedIN and he has not worked in any fund, real estate or a capital markets firm.[1]
2. Despite the lack of any experience in these areas, the global private Equity firm hired him as a senior advisor in July 2019.
3. Blackstone is touted as the pioneer in listing REITs in the country along with its partners.
4.  Blackstone’s REIT Sponsorships: During Dhaval Buch’s tenure at Blackstone, the firm sponsored multiple REITs, including Mindspace REIT (India’s second REIT) in August 2020 and Nexus Select Trust (India’s fourth REIT) in May 2023. This period saw Blackstone becoming one of the largest investors and sponsors of REITs in India.
5. 2022-Present – SEBI Regulations and Advocacy: Following Madhabi Buch’s appointment as SEBI Chairperson in March 2022, SEBI proposed and implemented several regulatory changes benefiting REITs, including nomination rights for unit holders like Blackstone. Meanwhile, Madhabi Buch publicly advocated for REITs as a promising investment, without disclosing her husband’s affiliation with Blackstone, which stood to gain significantly from these developments

On the basis of these points, Hindenburg questioned whether there is a conflict of interest, if not a capture of the institution and stated that their findings raise questions that merit further investigation.

 C. On Madhabi Puri Buch owned company-Agora Advisory- reporting Revenue

The following form the crux of the third set of allegations made by Hindenburg against Madhabi Puri Buch on her having 99% stake in a consulting firm that earns revenue 4x of her salary.

1. Agora Advisory Private Limited was set up in India on May 7th, 2013, with consultancy as main business activity. Madhabi Buch remains 99% owner with Dhaval Buch being a director in the company. At the end of 2022, the company had generated INR 19.8 million revenue from consulting per its annual report- 4 times Madhabi Buch’s salary as Whole Time Member of SEBI as per previous disclosures.
2. Another firm called Agora Partners Pte Ltd was registered in Singapore to do business and management consultancy with Madhabi Puri Buch as 100% shareholder.
3. Madhabi Buch remained a shareholder of the Singaporean Agora Partners even after becoming the Whole-Time member of SEBI.
4. After she became the chairperson at SEBI on March 1st, 2022, the stake owned by Madhabi Puri Buch in the Singaporean Agora Partners was transferred to her husband on March 16th, 2022.
5. Since this offshore Singaporean Agora Partners is exempt from disclosing financial statements, it is unclear whether it derives any revenue from consulting business or not-a crucial piece of information for those assessing the probity of Chairperson’s external business interests.

On the basis of these, Hindenburg questioned if these details were disclosed and called for more transparency.

Reactions to Hindenburg’s allegations-August 11, 2024. 

On having funds in obscure allegedly Adani Related fund and redeeming it

The Buchs released a joint statement saying that that the investments in funds referred to by Hindenburg(the IPE Plus Fund) were made when both of them were private citizens living in Singapore and 2 years before she joined SEBI as a whole time member-something that the Hindenburg Report had already clearly stated. They stated that the reason to invest in IPE Plus Fund was that the Chief Investment Officer-Anil Ahuja is a friend of Dhaval Buch and after him leaving the fund, the investment was redeemed. The statement also said that Anil Ahuja had confirmed that there was no investment by the fund in any bond, equity or derivative of any Adani Group Company.

On IPO to Real Estate Investment Trusts backed by Blackstone

The statement released by the Buchs said that Dhaval Buch’s appointment as Senior Advisor to Blackstone was on account of his deep expertise in Supply Chain Management and that his appointment pre-dates Madhabi Buch’s appointment as SEBI Chairperson. The statement said that not only was Blackstone Group [and ICICI Group] added to Madhabi’s recusal list maintained with SEBI but also indicated that regulations of SEBI across all sectors are approved by the board and not by its Chairperson-regarding the allegation that tweaks were made to benefit and promote REITs.

On maintaining the companies-Agora Partners and Agora Advisory while being a SEBI Official

The Buchs stated that the two consulting companies set up by Madhabi Buch became dormant on her appointment with SEBI and that these companies and her shareholding in them, were explicitly part of her disclosures to SEBI. The Buchs said that after Dhaval Buch’s retirement in 2019, he started his own consultancy through these two companies allowing him to work with “prominent” clients in the Indian market. The statement said that that linking accruals in these companies to Madhabi Buch’s salary at SEBI is malicious. They added that the shareholding of the Singaporean entity was also disclosed when the shares were transferred to Dhaval Buch in 2022.

Hindenburg’s Counter-11^th August 2024

Hindenburg Research, in a series of tweets, raised concerns about the Buchs’ response to their report, pointing out “new critical questions” and “important admissions.” One key issue was that Anil Ahuja, a former Adani director, was both a fund manager and a friend of the Buchs. Hindenburg claims this creates a conflict of interest, as SEBI is investigating Adani, a group linked to Ahuja. Meanwhile, SEBI chairperson’s husband is friends with Ahuja and the Chairperson herself had investments in his funds through her husband, even after joining SEBI. Hindenburg also alleges that this fund was used to siphon Adani’s private funds into the Indian stock market.

The counter of Hindenburg had revealed that the Indian Entity-which Madhabi Buch had stated has been dormant, is currently active and generating consulting revenue. Highlighting this, it questioned what other investments or businesses the SEBI Chairperson has engaged in through her husband’s name while serving in official capacity. It also asked whether the “prominent clients” her husband was engaged in included companies that SEBI is tasked with regulating.

SEBI’s Statement-11^th August

On the same day, SEBI issued a statement saying that the relevant disclosures required in terms of holdings of securities and their transfers have been made by Madhabi Buch from time to time and that she has also recused herself in matters involving potential conflicts of interest.

Further scrutiny of Buch’s tenure took place from various angles — whether she recused from only Blackstone related matters or also from the matters related to companies in which Blackstone had a stake in; her role in disposing off an insider trading case against one Atul Goel and his company which had connections with Blackstone.

Meanwhile, news platform Scroll.in reported on 30 Aug, 2024 that Madhabi Buch did not recuse herself from the market regulator’s investigation into alleged stock manipulation by Adani Group according to a SEBI Board Member and that in fact, she oversaw SEBI’s Adani Probe. SEBI members must disclose financial interests to the board, specifically to the board’s secretary. SEBI’s 2008 conflict of interest code allows the board to scrutinize the chairperson’s disclosures, but it did not do so in Buch’s case, according to the board member.

Congress’s Allegations against Madhabi Puri Buch and subsequent Responses 

A. Congress alleged on September 02, 2024 that Buch was drawing regular income-in the form of salary via ESOPs from ICICI bank while being a full time member of the board- a violation of Section 54 of SEBI Employees’ Service Regulations, 2001. Section 54 of the rules mandate that no employee shall accept, solicit, or seek outside employment or office, whether stipendiary or honorary, without previous sanction of the Chairman. The Congress further alleged that Buch dealt with complaints against ICICI and its affiliates and in one case, exempted the ICICI Group in a merger and acquisition matter. adjudicated complaints against ICICI and its affiliates, which it said amounted to a conflict of interest.

The ICICI bank issued a statement saying that it has not paid a salary or granted Employee Stock Ownership Plan benefits to Madhabi Puri Buch, the chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India, after she retired from the company in October 2013.

Following this statement, Congress further questioned why the Rs. 5.03 Crore of retiral benefits were not uniform in terms of frequency and the sum amount. The party’s Media and Publicity Wing Head Pawan Khera asked whether the ESOP Exercise policy was changed from ‘exercisable within 3 months of voluntary termination’ as stated in the policy submitted to the US Securities Exchange Commission to ‘exercisable within 10 years’ from the data of vesting too accommodate an arrangement with the SEBI Chairperson.

B. Congress alleged on September 6, 2024 that Madhabi Buch received rent from a company called Carol Info Services Limited, a company that shares its promoter with Wockhardt Limited. Wockhardt Limited’s executives were imposed penalties of Rs. 13 Lakh of insider trading; In June 2023, SEBI had barred a former executive of the company from buying, selling or dealing in the securities of Wockhardt Limited for one year. Pawan Khera, in a Press Conference, asked if it was appropriate for Buch to rent out her private property to a company that has been under constant scrutiny for insider trading.

C. On September 10, 2024- the Congress alleged that Agora Advisory Private Limited — the Indian entity in which Buch owns 99% of stake in—earned Rs. 2.95 Crore from Mahindra and Mahindra, ICICI Bank, Dr. Reddy’s, Pidilite, Sembcorp and Visu Leasing and Finance. Out of the Rs. 2.95 Crore, 2.59 Crore was paid by Mahindra and Mahindra alone, added the party. In quid pro quo, SEBI has passed order favourable to Mahindra and Mahindra, according to the party.

Mahindra and Mahindra denied these allegations as false and misleading, and stated that they had hired Dhaval Buch in 2019 after his retirement from Unilever for his expertise in Supply Chain Management. It also denied the allegation of quid pro quo orders.

Buchs’ Response to Congress’ Allegations

Firstly, quoting the statements by companies which paid Agora Advisory, the joint statement by the Buchs said that Dhaval Buch being hired by the companies was solely due to his expertise as a Supply Chain Professional.

Second, on receiving money from Sembcorp and Visu Leasing and Finance- the statement said that the assignment concluded, and income was accrued in 2016-17; on receiving money from ICICI bank, the statement said that the money was interests on deposits and that ascribing motive to it is “unfortunate and defamatory.”

Third, on Rental Income, the statement said that Madhabi Buch has not dealt with any files related to Wockhardt and that there are procedures for dealing with cases and that no investigation files go to the Chairperson.

Fourth, on ICICI ESOPs, the statement said Madhabi was a retiring employee for whom the ESOP rules were different i.e., exercisable within 10 years, unlike for resigning employees. The statement also said that SEBI’s guidelines permit board members including Chairperson to hold and transact in ESOPs provided requisite disclosures are made, which Buch has been doing since 2017. The statement also said that this drawing of money via ESOPS would not amount to moonlighting.

Finally, the statement said that the income tax returns filed by them were obtained using fraudulent and illegal means—breaching their privacy— and that all these matters were fully disclosed, and taxes were paid.

Conclusion

The allegations against Madhabi Puri Buch, SEBI Chairperson, highlight several unanswered questions and underline the need for greater public accountability in India’s regulatory institutions. Despite the Buchs’ defense and SEBI’s statements, critical concerns remain unresolved. Key among these is the possible conflict of interest between Buch’s role as SEBI Chairperson and her past business associations, as well as her oversight of the Adani probe despite her alleged connections. This also raises a larger question of the possible conflicts of interest when an influential private sector professional becomes a regulatory body chief.

Hindenburg Research raised issues about her relationship with Anil Ahuja, her husband’s consultancy work with Blackstone, and her involvement in companies like Agora Advisory. Questions persist about the transparency of her financial disclosures and whether SEBI has sufficiently scrutinized potential conflicts of interest, and whether SEBI had full understanding of such conflict or not, especially due to a board member saying that disclosures were not made properly. The important part about disclosures is that the be made without delay and with best of intentions. If they are made after their utility diminishes, it would not serve the purpose.

Moreover, Buch’s continued engagement in companies like Agora Partners even after assuming her role at SEBI raises concerns about regulatory oversight. The controversy surrounding her non-recusal in Adani-related investigations and the alleged non-disclosure of financial interests calls for a closer look at SEBI’s internal mechanisms to safeguard institutional integrity.

At the heart of these allegations is a broader issue—the need for robust public accountability. SEBI, as the guardian of India’s $5 trillion stock market, must ensure that its leadership is beyond reproach. Regulatory institutions like SEBI wield significant power over the financial ecosystem, and any hint of conflict or misconduct at the highest level can erode public trust. This scandal underscores the urgent need for more stringent checks, transparent investigations, and mechanisms to hold senior officials accountable. Strengthening these processes is vital to safeguarding the credibility of India’s financial markets and regulatory institutions.

[1] Whole the Hindenburg Report mentions that he has not worked in any Capital Markets position etc, his LinkedIn profile does show that he has been with Agora Advisory since his retirement from Unilever.

The post All You need to know about allegations against SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and her Response appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Quoting the September 27 MoEFCC’s Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) meeting,  released on October 2, a senior scholar-activist of the top environmental advocacy group South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP) has reported that in a “respite” to forest dwelling communities, fragile biodiversity and community conservation areas, the EAC has “rejected” the Adani application for project.

However, the window for continuing with the controversial project hasn’t been entirely closed. To quote Parineeta Dandekar, the proponents have been asked “to apply afresh” for Stage I Clearance, adding several conditions to assessment. To quote her, “The EAC did not approve the Adani application for amendments in the Terms of Reference (TORs) earlier granted for 1200 MW Warasgaon-Warangi Pumped Storage Project (PSP) by Adani Green Energy.”

Appreciating the move, Dandekar said, the EAC not just “rejected” the application but “decided to visit sites all the PSPs that have applied for environment clearance before giving any further clearances”, hoping, “The site visits will expose the perilous siting of over 15 pumped storage projects in the Western Ghats.”

In a detailed analysis on September 24 on the advocacy group’s website, Dandekar had pointed  to how the upper dam of 1500 MW Warasgaon Warangi Project “was set to destroy a sacred fish pool and sacred grove of Goddess Varadayini in the village Tekpowale.” This followed an SANDRP submission to the EAC outlining the impacts of this project on the “ecologically sensitive area” and the “wider cumulative impact” of the multiple PSP schemes in the Western Ghats.

The submission was signed by more than 200 individuals and organizations, including Parineeta Dandekar and Himanshu Thakkar of SANDRP; Suniti SR and colleagues of the National Alliance for People’s Movements; Shailaja Deshpande and colleagues of the Jeevit Nadi; Priyadarshini Karve of the Indian Network on Ethics and Climate Change; Jaideep Baphana of Pune River Revival (a group with over 1000 members in Pune); and Shripad Dharmadhikary of the Manthan Adhyayan Kendra, Pune.

Quoting the minutes of the  EAC meeting, Dandekar said, it asked the project proponents to prepare “a new project layout which will not obstruct rivulets in Western Ghats” and “change the project layout to reduce impact on forest land”. Refusing to grant TORs (Stage I Clearance) to the project and deciding on a site visit to all the proposed  PSP sites in the Western Ghats for which TORs have been issued prior to granting Environmental Clearance, EAC said, “These projects are located in the ecologically fragile Western Ghats and huge forest area is also involved”.

She quoted EAC as rejecting the Adanis’ TOR given on February 13, 2023 which had specifically said the project proposes to use water of the catchment of the lower reservoir for initial filling and annual recuperation of losses, pointing out, this will “impact several small rivulets draining into these reservoirs as the water will not be released downstream.”

Said Dandekar, the EAC was of the view that project proponents had “changed configuration of the project drastically which could attract more impact on the environment”,  raising concerns about “change in the total forest land required for the project with an increase of more than three times, i.e. from 24.50 ha to 88.98 ha.”

Hence, the EAC suggested submission of a fresh proposal for grant of TOR with modified pre-feasibility report (PFR) with “fresh alternative site analysis modifying the project layout with no obstruction of small rivulets in the area as the small rivulets are the key source of water for the perennial rivers in the western ghats”, and “change in project profile i.e. change in project layout, change in forest land and private land requirement.”

At the same time, the EAC  noted that  the MoEFCC had granted TOR to approximately 15 projects in the Western Ghats, but “given the region’s high environmental sensitivity”, there should be site visits by sub-committee members to several PSPs as these  are located in “the ecologically fragile Western Ghats and huge forest area is involved”. Hence, the need for a site visit “in toto wherever possible.”

In her September 25 analysis  of the project prior to the EAC move, Dandekar (photo), who had visited the project site earlier, had said, Adani Energy’s had planned the project “in a remote, densely forested area of the Western Ghats and enveloped by dam backwaters” around Tekpowale village, which “feels like a place lost in time”.

“This village”, she said, “narrowly escaped submersion from the Panshet Dam and now precariously perches on its encroaching backwaters. The Warasgaon Dam backwaters lie about seven kilometers away, with Mulshi and Temghar Dams approximately 19 kilometers distant and Pawana Dam around 48 kilometers”, adding, “The region is densely packed with dams; a mere straight-line distance of 66 kilometers from the northern-most Thokarwadi Dam to Panshet encompasses ten large dams in the Mula-Mutha Basin.”

According to Dandekar, “Unsurprisingly, Maharashtra holds the distinction of being the most dammed state in India, and this area might be the most heavily dammed within the state. Despite the proliferation of dams, upscale resorts, and urban developments like Lonavala and Lavasa encroaching upon the Western Ghats’ forests.” Yet, the region “still boasts vital community conservation areas, including sacred groves, temple forests, and remarkable community fish sanctuaries.”

Recalling her visits to Tekpowale, she said, they have “often revolved around its cherished fish sanctuary, which preserves a sacred pool devoted to Vardayini, a fierce forest goddess known as the Bestower of Boons. Surrounded by an ancient dark grove, the pool is home to sacred Mahseer fish, which villagers protect with utmost reverence. The grove, adorned with traditional garments and offerings, forms an eerie yet majestic setting.”

Pointing out that the community in the village “strictly forbids fishing in this sanctuary, believing the Mahseer bears a distinctive mark given by their goddess—similar to tales from other regions in India about fish marked by divine figures”, Dandekar noted, “Even in times of drought, the villagers refrain from drawing water from the pool, opting instead to carry it by hand as a show of respect.”

Praising this as a “community-driven conservation model”,  signaling “a successful commitment to safeguarding their sacred spaces and the biodiversity they support”, she warned, “This tranquil setting faces a dire threat. Adani Energy plans to create a 56-meter-high dam just upstream of Vardayini’s pool, resulting in the flooding of 49 hectares of dense forest within the proposed Velhe-Mulshi Conservation Reserve. This not only jeopardizes a culturally revered site but also threatens the diverse freshwater ecosystem.”

She underlined, “The 1500 MW Warasgaon-Warangi Pumped Storage Project will involve the construction of two massive dams—one in Tekpowale and another in Warangi—connected by a two-kilometer underground tunnel… Despite its proclaimed benefits, the environmental implications of such a project in a biodiversity-rich and sacred region are concerning.”

Calling the project’s pre-feasibility study “superficial” focusing “solely on economic factors while neglecting ecological realities, such as the presence of the Varadayini Fish Sanctuary”, Dandekar said, “The project would disturb not only the sacred pool in Tekpowale but also the nearby Walen Kondh Fish Sanctuary, without acknowledging its significance in project considerations.”

Asserting that the “communities like those in Tekpowale, deeply connected to their land and water, oppose any developments that threaten their heritage”, she said, “The claim that the Warasgaon-Warangi Project supports green energy initiatives is misleading”. She added, “The destruction of these sacred places is anything but eco-friendly and sustainable. As the guardians of Vardayini and her sanctuary, the villagers of Tekpowale stand resolutely against the encroachment of industry into their revered spaces.”

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Modi govt distancing from Adanis? MoEFCC ‘defers’ 1500 MW project in Western Ghats appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 “Why have they approached the Supreme Court directly?” Justice Gavai asked Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, representing both journalists, at the outset of the hearing. “The notice is completely without jurisdiction. They cannot be driven to go to that place,” the senior counsel promptly countered. The first question, she said, is by what authority of law the Gujarat police issued these notices, states LiveLaw.

“The notice is issued purportedly in connection with a preliminary inquiry instituted to probe into the article, on the basis of an investor’s application,” Jaising told the bench, before pointing out that Nair and Mangnale had not been provided with copies of the application that the summonses referred to. Not only this, but the duo were neither informed of the legal provisions invoked to issue the notices nor whether a first information report (FIR) was pending against them in connection with these notices. Moreover, when they wrote to the Ahmedabad crime branch seeking additional information, they were told that the documents sought would be provided when they appeared for questioning.

The Gujarat police reportedly also informed Ravi Nair and Mangnale that the question of registering an FIR would not arise at this stage, Jaising revealed. “Therefore,” she argued, “If it is their case that no FIR has been registered, then by what authority are they being called?”

“Is it a Section 41A notice? Is it a notice under Section 160? Do they stand in the character of the accused? Or are they witnesses? There’s no clarity,” Jaising emphatically contended. She also added that if the notices had been issued under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, under which police officers can compel the attendance of witnesses, they were liable to be set aside on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. “If they are Section 160 notices, they could not have been issued by the Gujarat police since their residence is in Delhi. Gujarat police’s jurisdiction does not extend to Delhi.”

It is also not a notice under Section 41A of CrPC, Jaising insisted, pointing to the non-registration of an FIR –

“Offences must be cognizable or non-cognizable. There’s no third category. If it’s a cognizable offence, an FIR under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be registered. On their admission, no such FIR has been registered. If that is the case, then by what authority are they being summoned to appear before an officer who does not have jurisdiction to summon them?”

 “This is nothing but pure and simple harassment and a prelude to a possible arrest,” she asserted, “There is no authority to summon them and these summonses are a violation of their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.”

The violation of the fundamental right to life and liberty of the two journalists, Jaising contended, justified a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. “There’s no reason why they should be driven either to appear before this police officer, or to approach any high court.”

After hearing the senior counsel’s submissions, the Justice Gavai-led bench issued notice on both pleas. At Jaising’s insistence, the court also agreed to grant the duo interim protection from coercive action.

Background

In January 2023, the United States-based Hindenburg organisation published its report accusing the Adani group of widespread manipulations and malpractices to inflate its stock prices. Adani Group refuted the allegations by publishing a 413-page reply.

In March, the Supreme Court constituted a committee to be headed by former top court judge AM Sapre and appointed former bankers OP Bhat and KV Kamath, Infosys co-founder Nandan Nilakeni, advocate Somasekharan Sundaresan, and retired judge JP Devadhar as members of the committee. This committee was directed to submit its report in a sealed cover within two months. At the same time, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) was also asked to continue its investigation into the volatility in the Indian securities market and submit its report within two months.

The expert committee submitted its report in May, announcing its prima facie finding that there is no regulatory failure on the part of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) with relation to the Adani group of companies. The market regulator, after seeking multiple extensions, finally submitted its report in August, informing the court that out of the 24 investigations in the Adani-Hindenburg matter, 22 have attained finality, while the remaining two are currently underway.

In the duration, journalist Ravi Nair and OCCRP South Asia editor Anand Mangnale have come under the Gujarat police’s scanner for a critical article they co-authored along with NBR Arcadio entitled ‘Documents Provide Fresh Insight Into Allegations of Stock Manipulation That Rocked India’s Powerful Adani Group’. This article was published on the website of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. In October, Nair and Mangnale received notices from Ahmedabad’s crime branch directing them to appear in person in connection with a preliminary inquiry being conducted on the strength of an application by an investor, Yogeshbhai Mafatlal Bhansali.

Related:

UP cancels Adani’s tenders even as RSS’ Organiser inspires a social media onslaught alleging a conspiracy against ‘Adani brand of nationalism’

Anti-Adani Kerala sea port protest: 3,000 booked over alleged police station attack at Vizhinjam, all-party meeting today

The post Supreme Court gives two journalists interim protection from Gujarat police arrest over article against Adani Group (Hindenburg issue) appeared first on SabrangIndia.

First published on 09 Feb 2023

From about four days ago, two articles in Organiser, the mouthpiece of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh(RSS) launched its unique defence of Gautam Adani and his group and predictably set of an IT cell driven twitter flurry bad-mouthing senior independent journalists and not even sparing India’s largest philanthropist, Azim Premji. From Ravish Kumar, Abhisar Sharma, Seema Chishti to independent media outlets, this all out diatribe is clearly aimed at sketching a tale of a conspiracy that stretches far and wide with a motive to impact the 2024 general election. Two articles appeared on the web portal of the Organiser, one of February 4 the other on February 6.

The Adani group has been in the midst of an international storm, amid speculations of serious manipulations in the investment market after the New York investment firm, Hindenburg Research, published a report calling the Adani Group “the largest con in corporate history”. This was on January 24, 2023. In a series of statements, the group responded by saying that the report was “maliciously mischievous”, “un-researched” and intended to “sabotage” a secondary share offering of the group’s flagship listed company, Adani Enterprises. The group also said that Hindenburg had published its report “without making any attempt to contact us or verify the factual matrix”. This did not stop the impact of the Hindenburg report on Adani’s credibility, the fall in share prices and huge depletion in the personal wealth of the politically connected billionaire and the political maelstrom within India, given the well-documented proximity he (and other) such capitalists have with India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi.

Before we get to the source of the ‘nationalism badge’ sought to be tagged on Adani, the fact that Uttar Pradesh, headed by Ajay Bisht aka Adityanath, a ‘model BJP state’, it’s state-owned Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited abruptly cancelled the tender that included the Adani Group’s bid for the supply of around 7.5 million smart meters estimated at ₹5,400 crore. This was on February 4, 2023. The cancellation of Adani’s bod, reported Moneycontrol came in the wake of serious objections raised by Indian Powers Engineers Federation (IPEF) and UP State Power Consumers Council that despite being the lowest tender, the per metre rate quoted by Adani was 67 per cent higher than the Rs. 6,000 per metre rate standardised by REC Limited, a public sector undertaking that promotes and finances power projects in India.

This recent decision, has more to do with accountability in public finances than rhetoric. And UP is a hard Hindutva state. The RSS mouthpiece is silent on this as are the army brigade of the far right on twitter.

Then there is the southern state of Andhra Pradesh (AP) nearly ten months ago as reported by the Economic Times. The AP government cancelled bids made for two separate tenders by Adani Enterprises to supply imported coal as the prices quoted were too high, two state government officials told Reuters. ET reported that this ‘ is the first time in recent years that a major government tender for imported coal has been cancelled over high prices. Details on the cancellation have not been previously reported.India has asked utilities to step up coal imports to address a domestic shortfallexpensive imports could add to the financial woes of state government-owned, debt-laden power distributors, which have overdue payments of nearly $15 billion to power generators. A compliant ‘national’ commercial media has let news of these two and distinct happenings, state governments of the Indian union cancelling big-shot Adani tenders on grounds of their non-viability. 

Both the Andhra Pradesh High Court and later the Bombay High Court had rejected the plea of Adani and the latter had even fined the conglomerate: The Bombay High Court had in June while rejecting the Adani Ports’ plea against its disqualification as non-meritorious also imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh for filing a case that lacked merit. Reason? The Financial Express had then reported that “JNPA had on May 2 (2022) written to Adani Ports that it was disqualified from participating in further stages of the subject tender process for upgradation, operation, maintenance and transfer of its container terminal for 30 years through Public Private Partnership. Adani Ports was disqualified as it had not revealed about termination of the concessionaire agreement between Adani Vizag Coal Terminal and Vishakhapatnam Port Trust (VPT) in 2020.” Congressman and senior lawyer AM Singvi had appeared for Adani ports.

These significant developments have escaped the eyes and ears of the public due to skeletal media analyses and follow-ups. Now, fast on the heels of the Hindenburg report, RSS’ with its huge power and clout has gotten into the act.

Back to the RSS and Organiser, though. First came a piece from the desk collated by one Yatharth Sikka based on the tweets of @vijaygajera and @thehawkeyex on February 4. Gajera whose social media name is Vijay Patel has over 110,000 follower and dubs himself a bhakt of Mahadev, proud Hindu activist and investigative farmer, son of a farmer and founder of @onlyfactindia. This handle also has coloured and targeted tweets, also constantly having rundowns with Altnews’ is Mohammed Zubair. The second handle proudly claims to have provoked criminal action against TMC member Saket Gokhale apart from pursing a clearly rightwing agenda. From this it is unclear whether the IT cell with its vast political support base has fed the Organiser or now with two published articles, Organiser has provided the fuel for the myriad accounts on twitter and Facebook spawned by the powerful Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its octopus-like affiliates.

The first article in the RSS mouthpiece,Decoding the hit job by Hindenburg against Adani Group draws a parallel between Hindenberg’s motives and what Soros is alleged to have done to ‘break the Bank of England and the Bank of Thailand’. It goes on to make wild allegations against Bob Brown Foundation (BBF), supposedly an environmentalist NGO, runs adaniwatch.org and slurs all the protests post 2017 “started by a few NGOs under the leadership of 350.org NGO. They have formed the group #StopAdani to stop this project.”

This narrative completely ignores the history of the protests that go back to 2015 when Australia’s indigenous people Wangan and Jagalingou, traditional owners of the land proposed to host Adani Group’s $12-billion mining project in the Galilee Basin of Queensland, have now sought an urgent intervention from the United Nations (UN) to stop proposed development of the massive Carmicheal coal mine.

Instead, the RSS organ attempts to draw sinister linkages between the NGO, 350.org and Tides Foundation to Soros and Tom Steyer, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller, Omdia and Bill Gates. Then it takes another leap to link the Indian NGO National Foundation for India (NFI) stating that it also got funds from Soros, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller, Omidyar, Bill Gates, and Azim Premji. Now Azim Premji’s NGO IPSMF was started, Organiser claims to ‘fund” Altnews, The Wire, The Caravan, The News Minute, etc., dubbed as ‘propaganda news websites’, when they are in fact pallbearers of independent media today. Seema Chishti, wife of CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury is under attack with the RSS magazine describing her as receiving a ‘Media Fellowship adviser at NFI” stating as if that is significant that ‘s She is the Editor of The Wire’ and also writes for ‘the Caravan. Seema Chishti, a senior journalist of repute has only last night (February 8 served a legal notice on the RSS Organiser and to Vijay Gajera/Patel demanding that they “stop and desist’ from any such scurrilous writing or legal action will follow. 

Interestingly, the Organiser is silent on the fact that the IPSMF has also supported Swarajya. Through its dubious and scurrilous reportage, in one fell swoop, the Organiser, paints independent journalists with a tarnished brush. Why? Is the attack on the conglomerate with its stated and visible proximity to the BJP and the powers that be, what has actually driven the parliamentary backbone, the hard-line RSS into agro defence mode?

Senior and popular journalist Ravish Kumar in his hard-hitting programme on his official YouTube channel in a hard-hitting programme on Monday, February 6: he titled Kya Yogi Adani ke khilaaf hai?, did a sarcastic take on the Organiser’s claims asking whether after this rather pointed and humiliating loss of tenders in UP, days before the much publicized ‘Rs 70,000 crore Global Summit in Lucknow the state’s capital, Gautam Adani the head of the massive corporate giant will show up there, and if so, what he would say??!! Ravish Kumar asks whether Adityanath who has just on February 4 cancelled the Adani tender for power electric metres after an assessment that they are 67 per cent would now be seen by the RSS-BJP IT cell brigade as ‘anti-national’?

A day before this, R Kumar did a satire around Hindenburg and its offices after a barrage of false tweets on social media alleged that he had been ‘fired’ from NDTV after the unethical Adani takeover of the television channel when in actuality, the popular Hindi journalist had resigned in protest on November 30, 2022! The  tweet of one Gaurav Pradhan Gurukul had cooked up facts stating that Ravish visited New York for a month where the Hindenburg’s offices are located when in fact the journalist has not travelled to the USA for a while now!

In this uniquely twisted  analysis published on its portal on February 6, titled Hindenburg Controversy: A Malafide intent to halt India’s economic growth authored by one Sunil Gupta, has blithely equated the exposure of the precarity of the Adani empire with an attack by a ‘foreigner enemy.’ An ingenuous assessment of India’s economy that ignores the human development indicators or the condition of the micro, medium and small-scale enterprises, joblessness or unemployment or nutrition levels among vast sections of Indians, this second special story actually states that, “ Hindenburg Research’s report on Adani could be a possible attempt by a foreign enemy in a bid to derail the country’s growth engine. 

In typical RSS style, it has pulled out of context one sentence from an otherwise detailed crisp and balanced report in the prestigious magazine. This paragraph from the report would give readers the real picture: “Mr. Adani is widely regarded as a master operator, with a genius for navigating the complicated legal and political landscape of Indian capitalism. Some investors have, though, occasionally expressed concerns about his group’s governance and opaque finances. That is the focus of Hindenburg’s report. It describes a complex network of funds and shell companies, some based in Mauritius, which interact with 578 subsidiaries spread through the seven publicly listed firms. Last year, Hindenburg claims, these entities engaged in 6,025 related-party transactions.” However, the mouthpiece of the RSS has cleverly used Economist’s tweet: https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1619657503704326145
“The episode has drawn the world’s attention to one of India’s corporate success stories—and a significant motor of the country’s recent economic growth”

Meanwhile the woes for Adani only grow. Not only has the conglomerate been pulled off the listed companies in the US exchange, the Credit Swisse and Citibank are expressing serious concerns in further bankrolling the outfit. A pending contact with France remains unsigned even as a big-ticket power deal with Adani power and our neighbor Bangladesh is seriously under scrutiny. The Daily Star, a prominent newspaper from Bangladesh recently published an article, stating that “ The 25-year power import deal with Adani “is hardly favourable for Bangladesh.”. This was on January 4, 2023 21 days before the Hindenburg expose, lest the conspiracy theorists jump in. The 25-year-old deal is being seen as possible because of the Narendra Modi administration’s patronization of the tycoon and the current leadership’s cozying up to New Delhi. The Daily Star says states, “Whether this power import from Adani Godda Coal-Fired Power Plant would be beneficial for Bangladesh has been in discussion for a while now. The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), in its 2018 report titled “Adani Godda power project: Too expensive, too late, and too risky for Bangladesh,” dubbed this power import as “too expensive and a poor strategic fit for Bangladesh.” According to its analysis, the reason for this relatively higher price is, instead of the local coal, Adani will use the coal imported from its stranded Carmichael coal mine in Australia. The imported coal will then be transported for 700km by railway from the seaport to the Godda Power Plant in the Jharkhand state of India. And all these costs will be passed on to Bangladesh, thanks to the favourable power purchase agreement for Adani.” The newspaper commented on a Washinton Post Particle writing on “”How political will often favours a coal billionaire and his dirty fossil fuel.” In this report, the Adani Group’s coal power export agreement with Bangladesh has been highlighted as an example of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s extraordinary patronage for the conglomerate, which has even crossed the borders. Citing a source from the Indian foreign ministry, the report mentioned that, during his first visit to Bangladesh in June 2015, Modi asked Bangladesh to “facilitate the entry of Indian companies in the power generation, transmission and distribution sector of Bangladesh,” one of the beneficiaries of which is the Adani Group. The Indian government however claims that the power import deal signed afterwards with Adani, on the basis of unsolicited proposals under the controversial Quick Enhancement of Electricity and Energy Supply (Special Provision) Act, 2010, and is beneficial for Bangladesh (Prothom Alo, June 10, 2015), after having the confidential 163-page power purchase agreement reviewed by three industry analysts, The Washington Post concluded that “the 25-year Godda deal is hardly favourable for Bangladesh.” Reason ? “First, Bangladesh must pay Adani Power Plant roughly USD 450 million a year in capacity and maintenance charges, regardless of whether it generates any electricity, which is very high by the industry standards. Second, the coal to fuel the power plant will be transported on an Adani-owned ship from Australia to an Adani-owned port in eastern India, then it will be transported to the plant on a stretch of Adani-built railway. The electricity generated will be sent to the border through an Adani-built high-voltage transmission line. As per the contract, shipping and transmission costs will be fully passed on to Bangladesh. Third, while other agreements with foreign power suppliers include clauses that would put a cap on the prices Bangladesh would pay if the cost of coal crossed a certain threshold, the Adani agreement stipulates that Bangladesh will pay the market price, according to The Washington Post report.”

From Lucknow to Vizag to Dacca and Paris, the deals that this powerful and spawning company is signing up are coming up for ethical questioning. Yet for the IT cell trolls and the RSS organizer acting in cohorts the questioning is a sign of a questionable patriotism. The battle is so much about propaganda rather than facts; time will tell which side triumphs.

#HindenburgExposed
Mr. Ravish Kumar – Anti India Journalist was fired after Adani takes over NDTV.

After that He visited New York for 1 month.
During the stay of 1-month Ravish Kumar visited Hindenburg new york office 7 times. Each meeting lasted for avg 2 hrs.
1/n

— Arun Rane ॐ (@ArunRane9) February 4, 2023

Some of the scurrilous tweets by the far right;

https://mobile.twitter.com/#HindenburgExposed Mr. Ravish Kumar – Anti India Journalist was fired after Adani takes over NDTV. After that He visited New York for 1 month. During the stay of 1-month Ravish Kumar visited Hindenburg New York office 7 times. Each meeting lasted for avg 2 hrs. 1/n

#HindenburgExposed
Mr. Ravish Kumar – Anti India Journalist was fired after Adani takes over NDTV.

After that He visited New York for 1 month.
During the stay of 1-month Ravish Kumar visited Hindenburg new york office 7 times. Each meeting lasted for avg 2 hrs.
1/n

— Arun Rane ॐ (@ArunRane9) February 4, 2023

The long message is circulating on the WhatsApp, a copy of that is posted by many people on twitter as a thread of tweets. This thread of tweets is one of them: 

Industrialist Azim Premji, the owner of Wipro Company, has come under the radar of Indian investigative agencies. Modi has taken the conspiracy against Adani very seriously.
Azim Premji’s companies and the educational institutes he runs are on the radar of Indian intelligence and

— Jyotilaxmi Nambiar Kurup (@PanchvatiNasik) February 6, 2023

We Hindus respect and adore people like, Azim Premji. But, do you know, he is one of the biggest financier for all Left-Liberal, anti-Hindu media. His personal trust nurtures anti-national elements in our country. Similar funding is being done by Murthi/Tatas

We Hindus respect and adore people like, Azim Premji. But, do you know, he is one of the biggest financier for all Left-Liberal, anti-Hindu media. His personal trust nurtures anti-national elements in our country. Similar funding is being done by Murthi/Tatas @JaipurDialogues

— R K U (@rajekup) February 7, 2023

Azim Premji stories are now circulating in WA groups, people are waking up to mentality of these people, from Bollywood to Business. 

Azim Premji stories are now circulating in WA groups, people are waking up to mentality of these people, from Bollywood to Business. pic.twitter.com/xnK99m3J8m

— AJ’s?? (@ajaysapra) February 6, 2023

I’m glad Wipro couldn’t find traction. Azim Premji funds many initiatives to break India. Wipro group should go bankrupt in near future. 

I’m glad Wipro couldn’t find traction. Azim Premji funds many initiatives to break India. Wipro group should go bankrupt in near future.

— Ankur ?️ (@GaikwadAnkur) February 7, 2023

Thank you so much to all the donors of IPSMF! Just because of your funding, this Arfa and others are able to create propaganda which now even Pakistanis are sharing against India! Thank you, Azim Premji, and Nilekani family for leading IPSMF!

Thank you so much to all the donors of IPSMF! Just because of your funding, this Arfa and others are able to create propaganda which now even Pakistanis are sharing against India!

Thank you Azim Premji and Nilekani family for leading IPSMF! https://t.co/TfMhZbNXFA

— Vijay Patel?? (@vijaygajera) February 6, 2023

This insane conspiracy theory about the Adani allegations is doing the rounds on WhatsApp. pic.twitter.com/UKo47v4mDk

— IndiaExplained (@IndiaExplained) February 7, 2023

Leftists and urban naxals..they get fund from azim premji, George Soros wtc

— kiran gowda (@Byrapuraa) February 7, 2023

Leftists and urban naxals..they get fund from azim premji, George Soros wtc

— kiran gowda (@Byrapuraa) February 7, 2023

It’s Azim Premji…

I m also shocked..

Ultimately M will M..

Never be an Indian by heart. https://t.co/BhJYPvizZP

— Laser Blade (@1963Atul) February 7, 2023

@Wipro, is this how Azim Premji works? Ask him not to be Gulfam Hasan. Why betraying such a beautiful country that has given so much respect to him?

— Mandar (Jai Hind)?? (@Mandar_JaiHind) February 7, 2023

No doubt! Does the Govt not know that? .@AmitShahOffice @jsaideepak Only recently we all saw how funding to destroy @AdaniOnline was provided by Azim Premji.

— Deejee (@Deejee01011945) February 6, 2023

Azim Premji is one of biggest philanthropist of India.

Besides IPSMF, which promotes public spirited media like TheWire Caravan AltNews Art14 ThePrint, Harsh Mander’s NGO CES receives more than 50% of its grants from big hearted Premji. pic.twitter.com/eql6oEkU6X

— The Hawk Eye (@thehawkeyex) February 6, 2023

Thank you so much to all the donors of IPSMF! Just because of your funding, this Arfa and others are able to create propaganda which now even Pakistanis are sharing against India!

Thank you Azim Premji and Nilekani family for leading IPSMF! pic.twitter.com/Nmf3zYV2qG

— Gaurav (@Gaurav44997252) February 6, 2023

Used to admire ethics of Azim Premji, however this changes everything… https://t.co/6UH16Qy8AM

— Redkesh (@Observer511) February 6, 2023

Used to respect azim premji a lot its sad to see him turning out to be such a madharchod

— Now (@Still_now_) February 6, 2023

Hindi tweets against Azim Premji:

क्या सच में अजीम प्रेमजी के एनजीओ अदानी ग्रुप के पीछे षडयंत्र कर रहे थे? #अदानी #AdaniFiles #Adani #AdaniGroup #wipro #azimpremji #HindenburgExposed https://t.co/PnOnlbLgin pic.twitter.com/UUsjf7ie6e

— Manish Kumar Gupta (@ManishGupta_FCA) February 6, 2023

भारत में एक स्वयंसेवी संस्थान है, जिसका नाम नेशनल फाउंडेशन फॉर इंडिया (NFI) है। इसे भी सोरोस, फोर्ड फाउंडेशन, रॉकफेलर, ओमिड्यार, बिल गेट्स, अजीम प्रेमजी की कंपनी फंड करती है। अजीम की कंपनी कुछ अन्य कंपनियों को भी फंड करती है, जो सरकार के खिलाफ सुनियोजित तरीके से अभियान चलाते हैं pic.twitter.com/UHwURQl5nt

— Himanshu Mishra ?? (@himanshulive07) February 3, 2023

अजीम प्रेमजी के नेतृत्व में एक एनजीओ IPSMF शुरू हुआ, जो Altnews, The Wire, The Caravan, The News Minute, आदि भारत विरोधी प्रोपोगंडा समाचार वेबसाइटों को फंड करता है।
“सीमा चिश्ती” एनएफआई” में मीडिया फेलोशिप सलाहकार हैं।
ये द वायर में संपादक हैं।
कारवां के लिए आर्टिकल लिखती हैं ?

— Bhupender ? विश्व हिंदू परिषद? (@Bhupend83259663) February 4, 2023

द वायर का सोरोस, फोर्ड, बिल गेट्स, अजीम प्रेमजी, ओमिडयार और रॉकफेलर द्वारा वित्तपोषित एनएफआई के साथ एक विशेष गठजोड़ है। pic.twitter.com/Wa81SAdlGA

— Narayana value Funds (@value_funds) February 2, 2023

मोदी के खिलाफ षड्यंत्र हो रहा है यह मैंने उसी दिन कह दिया था जिस दिन अडानी के शेयर को बुरी तरह से झटका लगा था. आज एक विस्तृत रिपोर्ट आई है आप भी पढ़ें विप्रो कंपनी के मालिक उद्योगपति अजीम प्रेमजी भारतीय जांच एजेंसियों के रडार पर आ गए हैं….1. https://t.co/qBrIUCz7zl

— CA Rajkumar Dohare (@DohareCa) February 6, 2023

विप्रो कंपनी के मालिक उद्योगपति अजीम प्रेमजी भारतीय जांच एजेंसियों के रडार पर आ गए हैं। अडानी के खिलाफ साजिश को मोदी ने बहुत गंभीरता से लिया है। अजीम प्रेमजी की कंपनियां और उनके द्वारा चलाए जाने वाले शैक्षणिक संस्थान भारतीय खुफिया और केंद्रीय जांच ब्यूरो के रडार पर हैं।

— Tushar dave (@Tushard61233069) February 6, 2023

Related:

The case against Adani Group’s power supply project in Bangladesh reaches Calcutta High Court

400 academics & activists express solidarity with fish workers’ protest against Adani International Seaport at Vizhinjam, Kerala

Adani group defamation case: Guj HC turns down Newsclick’s plea against interim injunction

Dow Jones removes Adani Ports from index for alleged ‘links with Myanmar military’

The post UP cancels Adani’s tenders even as RSS’ Organiser inspires a social media onslaught alleging a conspiracy against ‘Adani brand of nationalism’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On February 7, Lok Sabha witnessed a fiery address by Congress leader and MP Rahul Gandhi wherein he questioned BJP’s connection with Gautam Adani, who has allegedly committed frauds in his business as per the Hindenburg research report. Gandhi, to prove his point, had even displayed pictures showing Prime Minister Narendra Modi sitting with Adani, thus disclosing a link between them. Further, during his speech, Gandhi put forth a few questions related to the links of Adani with Modi and the BJP.

It was these questions that were expunged from the Lok Sabha proceedings by the Speaker Om Birla. A total of 18 remarks made during his almost hour-long speech have been expunged and this has not gone down well with the Congress and nor does it align with our Constitution and our fundamental rights. By expunging these remarks unwarrantedly, not only is the right to freedom of speech and expression of Gandhi violated but as citizens, our right to know or right to information about the Parliament sessions also gets impinged. 

Gandhi pointed out that in 2014, Adani was at 609 ranks in the world’s richest people’s list and in recent times he became the 2^nd richest (before the Hindenburg report release) in the world. He said that when you speak of ports, airports, roads, everywhere you hear that it is owned or operated or made by Adani. “How did he get so big? How did he enter all these businesses?” he questioned. The remarks/ questions he asked after this have been conveniently expunged by the Lok Sabha. 

Gandhi even showed pictures of Modi with Adani during his speech:

He asked the following questions to Modi:

“On how many of your foreign trips did you and Mr Adani go together?

How many times did Mr Adani join you later on a visit?

How many times did Mr Adani travel to a country immmediately after you did?

And in how many of these countries after you visited did Mr Adani get a contract?

How much money has Mr Adani given to BJP in the past 20 years?

How much (money) has he (Adani) given in Electoral Bonds?

Who owns these shell comnpanies in Mauritius?

These shell companies are routing thousands of crores of rupees into India, who money is it?

Is Mr Adani doing all this for free?”

He said this was “national security issue”.

प्रधानमंत्री जी, आप लोकतंत्र की आवाज़ को मिटा नहीं सकते। भारत के लोग आपसे सीधे सवाल कर रहे हैं। जवाब दीजिए! pic.twitter.com/xlUdLylvUw

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) February 8, 2023

While the questions themselves have not received any response from the BJP or the PM, the fact that they have been expunged from the records of the Parliament can be said to be an unconstitutional act.

When are words expunged?

Removing certain words from a member’s address to the House is fairly routine but it is to be done strictly in accordance with the rules of the House and the authority to do so lies with the person who is presiding the House. IN the case of Lok Sabha, it is supposed to be the Speaker. 

While Article 105(2) of the Constitution gives immunity to members of Parliament from court proceedings for remarks made in the Parliament, that freedom of expression is limited as well.

Article 105(2) of the Constitution states as follows:

“(2) No member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings”

At the same time, there are ‘Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha’ which the members have to follow. As per rule 380, only those remarks which are “defamatory or indecent or unparliamentary or undignified” are to be removed.

Rule 380 deals with expunction:

380. If the Speaker is of opinion that words have been used in debate which are defamatory or indecent or unparliamentary or undignified, the Speaker may, while exercising discretion order that such words be expunged from the proceedings of the House.

There is also a list of unparliamentary words that may not be spoken in the Lok Sabha by the members. Just before last year’s monsoon session words like words like ‘anarchist’, ‘Shakuni’, ‘dictatorial’, ‘taanashah’, ‘taanashahi’, ‘Jaichand’, ‘vinash purush’, ‘Khalistani’ and ‘khoon se kheti’ were declared an unparliamentary.

Here is the entire list of unparliamentary expressions:

If any of these words are uttered, they are deemed as unparliamentary and are expunged from the text of debate that is finally released after a particular session. Veen unedited text of debate is released every day after a session is concluded.

Can one report on expunged remarks?

However, even if these remarks are expunged, does that mean the people have no way of knowing what was said? There’s two ways to go about it, either one watches the Sansad TV while the proceedings are on but while many of us might not have the liberty of such time to sit and watch Sansad TV all day, that is what media houses are for!

There is no restriction on news media to publish these remarks even if they are expunged.

As per Article 361A of the Constitution, no one can be held liable for publishing true report of any proceedings of any house of the Parliament or Legislative Assembly. The Article states thus:

(1) No person shall be liable to any proceedings, civil or criminal, in any court in respect of the publication in a newspaper of a substantially true report of any proceedings of either House of Parliament or the Legislative Assembly, or, as the case may be, either House of the Legislature, of a State, unless the publication is proved to have been made with malice:

   Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to the publication of any report of the proceedings of a secret sitting of either House of Parliament or the Legislative Assembly, or, as the case may be, either House of the Legislature, of a State.

(2) Clause (1) shall apply in relation to reports or matters broadcast by means of wireless telegraphy as part of any programme or service provided by means of a broadcasting station as it applies in relation to reports or matters published in a newspaper.

   Explanation. — In this article, “newspaper” includes a news agency report containing material for publication in a newspaper.

Thus, in such cases, where remarks are unwarrantedly removed and with the people’s right to know about the proceedings in the Parliament, it becomes pertinent that media houses take advantage of this privilege bestowed upon by Article 361A and publish all that matters during the session. 

Kharge’s remarks in RS expunged

Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge’s remarks made in the Rajya Sabha were also expunged by the Chairperson Jagdeep Dhankar. Kharge had, in his speech made on Wednesday, raised similar questions as Gandhi did, related to Adani making big money in a short span, since BJP came to power. He also questioned why Modi had not made any comments about the hate speeches made by BJP leaders. Kharge had demanded formation of a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) to probe the Hindenburg report alleging various frauds committed by Adani.

“I don’t think there was anything unparliamentary or accusatory against anyone in my speech… But a few words were misconstrued… If you had any doubt, you could have asked in a different way, but you have asked for my words in six places to be expunged,” Kharge said in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday. He also mentioned that similar remarks made by former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee against former prime minister PV Narsimha Rao in the House continue to be part of the proceedings. 

Referring to Article 105(1) of the Constitution, Kharge wrote to Dhankar, “The institution of Parliament of India is a platform to fix the accountability of the Executive. This necessitates that the policies and the decisions of the government are discussed, dissected, and debated on the floor of the House. Any criticism of policies and decisions of the government and their fallouts cannot be construed as the allegation against any individual Member of the House”.  

Further, Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury wrote to Om Birla requesting that he revisit his decision to expunge remarks made by Gandhi in the Lok Sabha.

The Congress MPs staged a walkout in Rajya Sabha today over expunction of Kharge’s remarks.

Related:

Questions on Collegium haunt Budget Session; 18 names with SC for reconsideration

Over 16 lakh Indians renounced citizenship since 2011, 2.5 lakh in 2022 alone: GoI

A total of 6,775 URLs blocked by the IT Ministry in the year 2022

The post To what extent can an MP’s remarks be removed from Parliament records? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Calcutta High Court against Adani Group’s power supply project in Bangladesh. It was filed by 30 farmers of Murshidabad district and The Association for Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR), a Bengal-based civil rights group. The case was filed on Tuesday, January 31  and the expected date of hearing is February 07. 

The case was filed against Adani’s coal-based power project’s activities in Murshidabad district of middle Bengal, said General Secretary of APDR, Ranjit Sur. It has come at a time when the US-based financial fraud research firm Hindenburg Research has claimed that the Adani group had “perpetrated economic manipulation in the stock market for decades.” However, Sur said, the timing of the PIL – filed through a Calcutta advocate Jhuma Sen – is “merely coincidental.”

Following the report, the share prices of all companies of Adani Group in the stock market have fallen. The Group chief Gautam Adani’s personal wealth has also taken a beating. He has been moved from the third to the eleventh spot in the list of the richest people in the world.

The Adani Group has built a 1,600 MW power project in Jharkhand’s Godda district to deliver electricity from India to Bangladesh. This project is defined as an ‘ultra super critical coal-based power plant‘. Environmentalists in Jharkhand had previously raised questions about the plant.

According to the plan, the electricity cables from Godda will pass through several districts of North-West Bengal including Farakka in Murshidabad and Malda to finally enter Bangladesh. Adani’s Power Generation and Supply Company has planned to raise high-capacity electric lines over some of the villages in Farakka district. 

Eventually a major clash took place in Farakka in July 2022, when residents of Farakka’s Beniagram and Imamnagar village protested and managed to stop the project, at the time. According to the protesters, there were no prior discussions with them to lay high tension electric cables. Youth Congress leader Asif Iqbal led the protest. Some local leaders of Trinamool Congress also participated and harassed several workers of Adani Group, indicated district police. Some of the agitators were booked as well. 

One of the leaders of the protesting crowd Asif Iqbal, a youth Congress worker, earlier raised his concerns over the fact that high tension electrical wires passing over several houses made it almost impossible for the homeowners to build an extra storey of their respective houses. There has to be suitable compensation for this kind of a situation, he argued. 

According to the villagers, the Adani group has proposed to compensate only when houses have fallen under the cable. No compensation was offered to the owners of various mango and litchi gardens even though the wires were set between towers atop their farmland, argued local residents. 

Sur said that “from July 2022, preparations for the PIL began.” 

“The case was filed earlier this week. It has nothing to do with the Hindenburg Report. It is merely coincidental,” Sur told CJP. 

The agitation has stopped the installation of power lines in Farakka. However, even two weeks ago, agency workers came to cut down some of the trees in the project area. Sur said that the “villagers resisted the felling of the trees and workers engaged by Adani Group ran away.” However, following the July agitation, Adani’s company has completed the work substantially with police help.

Sur said that the Adani Group has neither signed an agreement with the Government of West Bengal, nor sought consent of the farmers, and planned unilaterally to raise high-tension electric lines purely by force. Towers were installed just by locally distributing some money.”

“The protesting farmers were framed by the police, fake allegations were made and cases were registered, they were severely beaten. We protested even in July and prepared for a legal battle,” he said. Adani Group has not made any statement so far. 

The Adani group is also planning to build a deep sea port at Tajpur in West Bengal’s East Medinipur district at a cost of around 25 thousand crore rupees. A few years ago in 2017, the farmers and residents of South 24 Parganas district protested against the installation of ‘high tension’ electricity in Bhangar. A few died in the movement. The work was delayed.

Related:

400 academics & activists express solidarity with fish workers’ protest against Adani International Seaport at Vizhinjam, Kerala

Adani group defamation case: Guj HC turns down Newsclick’s plea against interim injunction

Dow Jones removes Adani Ports from index for alleged ‘links with Myanmar military’

The post The case against Adani Group’s power supply project in Bangladesh reaches Calcutta High Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Senior journalist and NDTV’s Group Editor Sreenivasan Jain resigned from his post on Saturday ending a three-decade association with the national news channel. The move comes after the recent Adani takeover of the company in November 2022.

Jain announced his resignation on his official Twitter page amid allegations of fraud on the Adani Group by US-based Hindenburg Research.

“Hi all. An amazing, nearly three-decade-long run at NDTV comes to an end today. The decision to resign wasn’t easy, but .. it is what it is. More later,” he tweeted.

Hi all. An amazing, nearly three-decade long run at NDTV comes to an end today. The decision to resign wasn’t easy, but .. it is what it is. More later.

— Sreenivasan Jain (@SreenivasanJain) January 28, 2023

Jain’s resignation comes months after former senior NDTV India journalist Ravish Kumar resigned from his post in November.

Jain began working with NDTV in 1995. Over the years, he covered various prominent national and international news reports and conducted interviews with many eminent personalities and politicians. Jain hosted the weekly show Truth vs Hype on NDV 24×7. He was also the Mumbai bureau chief from 2003-2008 and was briefly the Managing Editor of NDTV’s business channel ‘Profit’.

Adani’s NDTV takeover:

On November 30, 2022, the Adani group gained full control of NDTV after it acquired most of the founders — Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy’s — stakes at a premium of almost 17 percent over the rate it paid to minority shareholders of the firm.

Though the takeover happened in November, the official announcement took place on August 23. Gautam Adani used RRPR Holdings Private Limited, a company that was founded by the Roys and bears their initials in its name, to buy 27.26 percent shares from Prannoy and Radhika Roy at a price of Rs 342.65 per share.

Adani Group first acquired Vishvapradhan Commercial Private Limited (VCPL), a little-known company that had given Rs 403 crore of an interest-free loan to RRPR Holdings in 2009-10 in exchange for warrants that allowed it to buy a stake in the newsgroup at any time. Adani group exercised those rights in August this year, which NDTV said was done without its consent.

The national news channel came out strongly condemning the decision taken without any discussions or consent with the Roys.

“The NDTV founders and the Company would like to make it clear that this exercise of rights by VCPL was executed without any input from, conversation with, or consent of the NDTV founders, who, like NDTV, have been made aware of this exercise of rights only today. As recently as yesterday, NDTV had informed the stock exchanges that there was no change in the shareholding of its founders,” the statement from NDTV said then.

As Adani formally took over the company on November 30, 2022, Prannoy and Radhika Roy submitted their resignation from the board of directors, even after claims by Gautam Adani that he had requested the Roys to continue serving as the network’s chair in an interview with the British daily Financial Times.

“Why can’t you support one media house to become independent and have a global footprint?” In the interview, Adani makes the comment that there isn’t a single news source in India that can be compared to outlets like the Financial Times or Al Jazeera.

He claims that his conglomerate’s investment in establishing a global media organisation will be “negligible.”

The board also appointed Sanjay Pugalia and Senthil Chengalvarayan as directors on the RRPRH board with immediate effect.

A day after Roy’s resignation, on November 30, 2022, NDTV received another blow with one of its most significant members – senior journalist Ravish Kumar from NDTV Hindi – announcing his disassociation with the company with immediate effect.

Announcing his resignation through his official Youtube channel an emotional but composed Ravish said that the ecosystem and atmosphere for journalism are being destroyed.

“At this time, I don’t want to say anything about my organisation,” Kumar said. “Because when one is emotional, one is not objective. I have spent 26-27 years in NDTV. A journey like that has many ups and downs.”

Ravish Kumar’s resignation took the Twitter world by storm as many journalists and opposition political parties expressed their concern over the future of NDTV.
 

In an interview to discuss his resignation from @ndtv and to discuss @gautam_adani‘s intention of acquiring a majority stake in NDTV and take over its channels, @ravishndtv says that Mr Adani is spending crores only to silence him (Ravish Kumar) and to make him unemployed. pic.twitter.com/yoOCuq1ZxE

— The Wire (@thewire_in) December 20, 2022

Ravish Kumar regularly reports on his Youtube channel – Ravish Kumar Official – on the current political situation and trends in the country. His team had recently covered Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s Bharat Jodo yatra in New Delhi. The yatra has reached its last leg – Jammu and Kashmir.

Courtesy: The Daily Siasat

The post Senior journalist Sreenivasan Jain resigns from NDTV appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It was around the time when his Primetime newshour show was usually telecast, 9 p.m. or so on November 30, 2022 that media was abuzz with the news many viewers were expecting: the resignation of Ravish Kumar from NDTV. Social media was flooded with messages and quotations from India’s popular television anchor. A day before the owner-promoters Pranoy Roy-Radhika Roy had stepped down from the channel’s promoter firm, RRPR Holding’s board as former journalists with the Adani group, Sanjay Pugalia, Senthil Chengylvarayan and Sudipta Bhattarcya occupied their place. The next morning, today, Ravish addressed his audience.

There was a barely controlled drama, inevitability, sadness and anger as hundreds of thousands viewers watched his ‘farewell NDTV speech’ on a recently launched YouTube Channel, Ravish Kumar Official. Auf Wiedersehen is a charming term in Austrian or German that simply does not allow a final parting: Until we meet again or goodbye for now, for the present. Auf Wiedersehen sums up what Ravish communicated this morning, perfectly.

The masterful use of language is Ravish’s forte and the December 1 address so beautifully resonated this. Among all else that he said, the manner and fashion, charm and grace with which he saluted the women and girls in his life –personal and professional– was rare, exceptional. The association and teaming up with women bettered him both as a journalist and a human being, Ravish told us showcasing the bitter and sly burden of patriarchy within newsrooms.

A proud Bihari belonging to the Bhojpuri language and a practitioner of the saral Hindi. Journalism is about the choice of language and in a country or nation where language domination has a colonial throwback, the language that Ravish brought to national television, and with it, a peer’s respect for the Urdu, the Marwadi, the Marathi, the Kannada, the Tamil, the Bengali, is unique. At the award ceremony of the first Gauri Memorial Trust in Bengaluru in September of 2019, the same month he was awarded the Magsaysay award, he spoke of the language behind communication. Then, in his acceptance speech, he delved deep into topics that ranged from Indian media and its role to the detriment of Indian democracy to Article 370 and its aftermath. He spoke about the Centre’s Hindi imposition while quoting from a poem by Kedarnath Singh evoking a thunderous applause from the audience.

Back now to the show. And this personal cum professional salaam to Ravish.

Hark back to 2016, the first dark assault by the Regime. When students of Hyderabad Central University (HCU) and Jawarharlal Nehru University (JNU) were reviled and abused by powerful in government, and this abuse was reflected and amplified on commercial television.

Darkness on India’s Prime Time News: In a scathing self-critique of India’s private prime time television news, especially the unprofessional conduct of well-known and lauded anchors, Ravish Kumar of NDTV India had a Blackened Out Screen on the News Hour for 45 minutes on Friday, February 19. Thereafter began his epiphany to India’s dying television news casters, the Godi media.

The video of this radical programme –still available on YouTube— is self explanatory. In simple and hard hitting Hindi, Ravish argues how the lynch mob is cultivated by the undemocratic and tyrannical conduct of television anchors in the name of debate. The immediate provocation was the lies being dished out on commercial television, the morphed and manipulated imagery being “sold” about JNU and its student leaderhip, dubbing them the anti-national and the terrorist.

“Yeh Andhera hi Aaj Ki TV ki Tasveer Hai.” (The dark screen is the true image of TV today).

“Debate ke naam par Janmat ka Maut Ho Raha Hai.” (People’s voices are being throttled in the name of debate)

Before a dark screen, we heard Ravish’s calm yet biting voice:

आप इस चीख को पहचानिये। इस चिल्लाहट को समझिये। इसलिए मैं आपको अंधेरे में ले आया हूं। कोई तकनीकि ख़राबी नहीं है। आपका सिग्नल बिल्कुल ठीक है। ये अंधेरा ही आज के टीवी की तस्वीर है। हमने जानबूझ कर ये अंधेरा किया है। समझिये आपके ड्राईंग रूम की बत्ती बुझा दी है और मैं अंधेरे के उस एकांत में सिर्फ आपसे बात कर रहा हूं।

The use of the Azaadi slogan by the iconic youth leader Kanhaiya Kumar, then with the CPI now with the Congress party, first during agitations and then 13 days after Ravish Kumar’s black-out broadcast on March 3, 2016 was precursed by all efforts to slur his image.

कन्हैया कुमार की तस्वीरों को बदल–बदल कर चलाया गया ताकि लोग उसे एक आतंकवादी और गद्दार के रूप में देख सकें। एक तस्वीर में वो भाषण दे रहा है तो उसी तस्वीर में पीछे भारत का कटा छंटा झंडा जोड़ दिया गया है। फोटोशॉप तकनीक से आजकल खूब होता है।

After that, there was this open letter, powerful, scathing and emotional to previously one of India’s most loved editors who has then not just demeaned himself politically but been mired in the most degrading of sexual harassment at the workplace scandals, MJ Akbar, now a politician. Senior journalist Priya Ramani had won a criminal defamation case slammed by Akbar, against her, in 2018, alleging ‘damage to his reputation (February 2021).’

Ravish Kumar reminded Akbar that the political change in the Indian landscape that ‘veteran journalists’ like Akbar call ‘great for India’has also forged a culture of abuse with media persons being called ‘presstitutes’ and ‘pimps and hustlers.’ Ravish Kumar in this open letter to Akbar on his blog reminded him that things had sunk so low that ‘my mother has been called a whore –a woman who does not know what an anchor is’  but is concerned about her son, Ravish Kumar’s health. When she found that her son was being abused in such vile language, she could not sleep for days. There is much more that Ravish says to Akbar abour political control and overt psychphancy (use of the prime minister’s photos on journalists’ ‘profiles) and the letter needs to be read and recalled in full. By students and practioners of the craft.

Today. NDTV India, the field television journalists who covered the Shaheen Bagh protests and the Kisan Andolan, the large number of lesser and bigger professionals who made up the Ravish Kumar Team—each and all received a mention today. Ravish Kumar, saluting the India and Indians that sat in protest against the CAA 2019 and the three farm laws, reminded us of the television anchor, who, through all his telecasts was not just a sharp critique but an unthreatening colleague who began his career with the channel he departed from yesterday, sorting out correspondences and letters. Today, with a fan club numbering millions he is the recipient of hand written missives from a vast audience that are also his collaborators, journalistically.

That then was the essence of the message that was finally communicated today: that the view of the Indian people matter, that democracy is about this accommodation and assertion. He spoke to the Indian people, the viewers, the last stakeholders of a democracy seriously under assault and attack. It was and is they who will be the final victors if and when Indian democracy does crawl out of the abyss; when ordinary Indian, sick neck deep with the hate poison they have consumed, force it to be cleansed out of the body politic. Thus spoke Ravish.

The ambush on the NDTV channel by corporate honcho, Gautam Adani, had first happened in August 2022: when the Gautam Adani-led Adani Group, acquired 29.18 per cent stake, and said it will launch an open offer as required by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to buy another 26 per cent in the company The stark message was there for all to see. In a notice to stock exchanges, NDTV said the acquisition was executed without any input from, conversation with, or consent of NDTV founders Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy. At the time, both held 32.26 per cent in NDTV.

Given this ‘backdoor ambush’ by a business unashamedly close to the ruling regime, back in August 2022, it was only a matter of time before senior journalists like Ravish did actually bow out. The millions of Indians for whom Ravish brings sanity, reason and hope however will not allow Ravish the last bow.

Related:

Also watch BBC’s trending Video- “Debunking the Viral Video of ‘sedition’ that has captivated India” 
 

The post The Curtain falls on a 27 year old Saga as over a Million Viewers don’t allow the Last Bow: Ravish Kumar appeared first on SabrangIndia.